BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: AB 1447
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: waldron
VERSION: 4/22/14
Analysis by: Eric Thronson FISCAL: yes
Hearing date: June 10, 2014
SUBJECT:
Greenhouse gas emission reduction funding for traffic signal
synchronization
DESCRIPTION:
This bill specifies that a traffic signal synchronization
project may be a sustainable infrastructure project and
therefore eligible to receive cap-and-trade program revenues
under certain circumstances.
ANALYSIS:
AB 32 (Nu�ez), Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006, requires the
California Air Resources Board (ARB) to adopt regulations
necessary to reduce the state's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
to 1990 levels by the year 2020. Among other measures, ARB has
implemented a market-based mechanism to help accomplish this
aim, commonly known as the cap-and-trade program, which creates
an emissions market and the opportunity for the state to raise
revenue through the auction of allowances to affected entities.
In 2012, the Legislature passed and the governor signed AB 1532
(P�rez), Chapter 807, which, among other things, established
broad categories within which the Legislature may appropriate
cap-and-trade revenues. Existing law specifies that these broad
categories include, but are not limited to, the following:
Energy efficiency, clean and renewable energy generation, and
similar projects
Advanced technology vehicles and infrastructure for goods
movement and public transit
Water, land conservation and management, and sustainable
agriculture
Sustainable infrastructure projects including, but not limited
to transportation and housing
AB 1447 (WALDRON) Page 2
Increased diversion of municipal solid waste from landfills
This bill specifies that a traffic signal synchronization
project may be a sustainable infrastructure project and
therefore eligible to receive cap-and-trade program revenues if:
1.It is designed and implemented to reduce GHG emissions, and
2.It includes specific reduction targets and metrics to evaluate
the project's effect.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose . According to the author, traffic light
synchronization is a cost-effective solution to many problems,
including reducing GHG emissions and alleviating congestion.
The author contends that this bill is necessary because
existing law does not clearly state that traffic signal
synchronization is eligible for cap-and-trade revenues, even
though studies suggest that such projects reduce GHG
emissions.
2.Good idea, questionable implementation . Traffic signal
synchronization generally refers to the practice of sequencing
the timing of traffic lights along a corridor, or within a
geographic area, to improve traffic flow. Studies show that
such projects have resulted in travel delay reductions between
13 and 94 percent, and a decrease of as much as 25 percent in
travel times. Optimizing traffic flow through light
synchronization can greatly reduce GHG emissions. For
example, Portland, Oregon found that, over the first six
years, their traffic signal optimization program prevented the
emission of more than 157,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide.
Due to the demonstrated emission reduction benefits of traffic
light synchronization, this bill attempts to clarify that such
projects are eligible to receive cap-and-trade revenues by
inserting this fact into a section of existing law that
currently only describes in broad categories how the
Legislature may use these revenues. While, in principle, it
appears to be a good idea to clarify that these types of
projects are eligible for cap-and-trade revenues because they
reduce emissions, inserting this clarification into existing
law the way this bill does may have unintended consequences.
For example, inserting a specific project type into a list of
broad expenditure categories could suggest that the
Legislature believes that this is the best or only good use of
AB 1447 (WALDRON) Page 3
these funds. Alternatively, including specific project types
in this section of law might suggest that anything not
specifically included is therefore not an eligible use of the
funds.
Opponents of this bill suggest that the Legislature intended
to broadly construe the particular section of existing law
that this bill amends in order to avoid confusion about what
specific projects are or are not good or eligible uses of the
funds. The Legislature intended to provide broad authority
and direction, while leaving the agencies and entities tasked
with implementing emission reduction strategies with this
funding to determine the best specific strategies.
Another way to state clearly that traffic light
synchronization projects are an eligible use of these funds
would be to add a separate section of law that simply states
these types of projects are sustainable infrastructure
projects and therefore eligible for cap-and-trade funding.
The committee may wish to amend the bill to move the language
in the bill to another section of state law where it is more
appropriate to declare a specific emission reduction strategy.
3.Double-referral . The Rules Committee referred this bill to
both the Transportation and Housing Committee and to the
Environmental Quality Committee. Therefore, if this bill
passes this committee, it will be referred to the Committee on
Environmental Quality.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 70-2
Appr: 17-0
Trans: 16-0
Nat. Res.: 9-0
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday, June 4,
2014.)
AB 1447 (WALDRON) Page 4
SUPPORT: AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah
Advantec Consulting Engineers
Automobile Club of Southern California
City of Albany
City of Belmont
City of Clovis
City of Dublin
City of Fairfield
City of Monterey
City of Sacramento
Econolite Group
Institute of Transportation Engineers Western
District
PHA Transportation Consultants
San Mateo County Transportation Authority
TJKM Transportation Consultants
One individual
OPPOSED: California Chamber of Commerce
California League of Food Processors
California Manufacturers and Technology
Association
California Municipal Utilities Association
California Taxpayers Association